2012 (8) TMI 453 - AT - Income Tax

Disallowance of claim u/s 80 IB - the assessee does not fulfil the requirement of employing 10 or more workers in the manufacturing process during the relevant financial year - assessee has employed 11 persons in the factory including 2 Watchmen, 1 Accountant cum-Factory Manager - Held that - The watchmen in their statement recorded by the AO had stated that they are also performing the duties like packaging, preparing gate pass, maintaining attendance register etc., clearly shows that they are engaged in the activity of manufacturing process carried out by the assessee in the factory. Similarly, the factory manager performing the activity of supervising and managing the manufacturing process and therefore, the same are integral part of manufacturing process - assessee has complied with the conditions of employing 10 workers - in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
- Disallowance of claim under section 80 IB due to insufficient number of workers employed in manufacturing process
- Consideration of watchmen and factory manager as workers engaged in manufacturing process

Analysis:
The appeal by the revenue challenged the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) order for the assessment year 2002-03, wherein relief was granted to the assessee regarding the claim under section 80 IB. The primary issue revolved around the requirement of employing 10 or more workers in the manufacturing process, as per section 80 IB. The Assessing Officer initially disallowed the claim, stating that only 8 workers were employed throughout the year, falling short of the mandated number. This led to a series of appeals and subsequent directions for reconsideration of evidence.

Upon examination, it was revealed that the Assessing Officer did not consider the watchmen employed by the assessee as workers engaged in the manufacturing process. The Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals), however, allowed the claim based on the decision in a similar case involving M/s Panorama Industries. The crux of the matter was whether the watchmen and the factory manager should be counted as workers in connection with the manufacturing process, a pivotal point of contention between the revenue and the assessee.

The revenue contended that only workers directly involved in the manufacturing process should be considered, relying on a specific decision by the jurisdictional High Court. Conversely, the assessee argued that a broader interpretation was warranted, citing subsequent judgments that expanded the scope of workers eligible for consideration under section 80 IB. The assessee highlighted the importance of roles like clerks, watchmen, and factory managers in the overall manufacturing process.

In the final analysis, the Tribunal considered the roles and duties performed by the watchmen and the factory manager in connection with the activities carried out by the assessee in the factory. It was established that these roles were integral to the manufacturing process, aligning with the broader interpretation advocated by the assessee. The Tribunal referenced previous decisions and High Court judgments to support the inclusion of various positions beyond direct laborers in the count of workers for section 80 IB eligibility.

Ultimately, the Tribunal upheld the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals), ruling in favor of the assessee and dismissing the appeal by the revenue. The judgment emphasized the comprehensive nature of the manufacturing process and the significance of roles beyond mere laborers in fulfilling the conditions of section 80 IB.